This paper examines digital ethics and the concept of netiquette as social codes governing interaction in online communities. Drawing on Richards's framework, it discusses how the absence of nonverbal cues and the prevalence of anonymity in digital spaces create distinct ethical challenges. The paper applies Aristotle's three rhetorical appeals—logos, pathos, and ethos—to analyze how users construct online personas, particularly on Facebook. It argues that while Aristotelian persuasion offers an interesting theoretical lens, most users construct their digital profiles pragmatically rather than strategically, suggesting a gap between theoretical ideals and actual online behavior.
Dan Richards coins the phrase "netiquette," a hybrid word combining "network" and "etiquette," to describe a new social code that is developing in digital spaces (Richards, n.d.). All groups form social norms when they interact with each other, and these norms develop over time. Groups collectively form opinions and shared standards about a range of different issues. Some of the issues that Richards presents are related to technology and ethics, including items such as:
These questions demonstrate how digital spaces present novel ethical challenges that traditional social codes do not fully address. Understanding netiquette is essential for navigating online communities effectively and ethically.
The environment online is fundamentally different from face-to-face networking. In physical relationships, individuals experience more cues from nonverbal language—facial expressions, tone of voice, body language—and other contextual signals that are unavailable in the digital world. Additionally, online spaces provide substantial anonymity. Members of a forum may go by a screen name or avatar and need not be directly identifiable. This combination of absent nonverbal feedback and increased anonymity makes the importance of a set of digital ethics an essential aspect of these communities. Users must navigate ethical decisions without the social accountability that physical presence provides.
Richards uses Aristotle's appeals to describe the concept of persuasion and its role in constructing an online persona. In Aristotle's Rhetoric, there are three overarching appeals used to classify how arguments are made: logic (logos), emotion (pathos), and the character of the speaker (ethos) (Richards, n.d.). These factors work together collectively to form an overall portrayal of credibility and persuasiveness. The logos appeal emphasizes reasoning and evidence; pathos appeals to the audience's emotions; and ethos establishes the speaker's trustworthiness and character. Together, they shape how an audience perceives a message and its source.
These rhetorical concepts are applicable to Facebook profiles and other online activities. A Facebook profile contains information about a user organized in distinctive categories that can be interpreted along the lines of Aristotle's concept of persuasion. Since users choose their own material, their self-representation is somewhat flexible, and they can portray themselves in a wide array of different ways through the content they select. According to Richards's article, the portrayal should be aligned with your overall goals, whether they relate to personal or professional ambitions. Users who thoughtfully curate their profiles can leverage ethos to establish credibility, pathos to build emotional connection, and logos to demonstrate competence and reasoning.
However, I do not believe that many Facebook users consider Aristotle's arguments when constructing their profiles. In fact, most users do not consider the overall design of their Facebook profile at all. It is usually constructed out of random content or pictures that accumulate as the use of the profile progresses over time. Eventually a design emerges, but that design is commonly an afterthought rather than an intentional strategy. For example, many people do not take the time to completely fill out the sections about their biographical, work, or relationship information. While looking at a Facebook profile through the lens of Aristotle's argument on persuasion might seem theoretically interesting, it does not seem relevant to impose a design standard when most people completely forego intentional design on their online presence. Digital identity in practice appears to develop organically rather than according to classical rhetorical principles, suggesting a significant gap between academic theory and user behavior.
This paper has examined the concept of netiquette and how digital ethics apply to online communities and social media platforms. While Richards's application of Aristotle's rhetorical appeals provides a sophisticated framework for understanding how digital personas are constructed, the theory does not reflect how most users actually build their online profiles. The tension between prescriptive theory and descriptive reality reveals that digital ethics are not merely matters of deliberate rhetorical choice, but also of practical convenience, habit, and organic community development. A more complete understanding of digital ethics must account for both how users should behave according to established rhetorical and ethical principles, and how they actually do behave in these emergent digital spaces.
You’re 89% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.